Fabian Delph - Signed for Manchester City

[olaftab]

Fabian Delph, 25, can leave Aston Villa for just £8m this summer after the club agreed a remarkable release clause in his new contract, understood to apply only to teams involved in European competition. (Telegraph)

[john e]

Fabian Delph, 25, can leave Aston Villa for just £8m this summer after the club agreed a remarkable release clause in his new contract, understood to apply only to teams involved in European competition. (Telegraph)

West Ham will be in for him then

[ozzjim]

He posed for a photo shoot with Villa is my Club and this will show how loyal, what type of guy I am etc. I just can't see, unless we had gone down, him showing any interest in going this summer.

[LeeB]

Maybe he had it put in in case Lambert was still manager.

[Toronto Villa]

Maybe he had it put in in case Lambert was still manager.

Haha true, but surely he'd have not signed at all. I know I wouldn't have.

[kippaxvilla2]

I seem to remember only one occasion previously where the club felt compelled to come out and deny some specific transfer speculation.  I can't remember who it was about but seem to remember it was an MO'N lead statement.

[UK Redsox]

Fabian Delph, 25, can leave Aston Villa for just £8m this summer after the club agreed a remarkable release clause in his new contract, understood to apply only to teams involved in European competition. (Telegraph)

West Ham will be in for him then

Bala Town F.C. - you heard it here first

[old man villa fan]

I thought release clauses usually stated a minimum amount and not an actual amount.  Also, are there not two types of clause, one an express contractual and the other an implied good faith type.  In both cases, isn't there usually a limiting factor on triggering the clause e.g. relegation, CL qualified club etc.  With a minimum amount, wouldn't this imply that you could get two or more teams bidding.  The player is not a free agent.

As a player is under contract for a stipulated period, what about the remaining term of the contract.  Does the player (invariably the buying club) have to buy out of his contract.

Regarding the club making statements about media speculation (however well grounded), I do not think they should make comments as this is just what the media want.  It would be the crack that the media would be able to worm their way through to open up the full workings of the clubs.  It would become a media circus.

The trouble is, everybody wants to know everything now rather than wait for events to run their course and be told factual news after the event.  The media industry is built on speculation, exclusives, source close to said etc., to the point that the recipient of media attention does not fight it legally if not correct, they just ignore it.  In the case of Delph v Aston Villa, the player, his agent and the club know the facts as there is a private contract between the player and the club and it should stay private as it affects the two parties in more ways than just the contract between them.

The important thing regarding the contract should be the intent when they signed and whether you believe in the integrity of the player.  Conspiracy theories regarding the PR surrounding signing of the contract are wildly speculative in my opinion.

[boboonthecorner]

Two things I found out today. First of all just had a text from a client saying that Jack Grealish and a few other players just sprayed a £20k bottle  of champagne over her at a beach party, she said they are sat with a 5 foot bottle of Belvedere Vodka. Will they ever learn?? The next thing I talk to Lisa Smith on FB, she now runs a PR company in Brum but was a reporter at The Mail. I know she is close to Jack so I ask her about this and I ask about the Delph rumoour. Her reply was that Delphs departure is imminent, although I'm hoping she is wrong and its just a rumour??

[Richard]

If Delph and Benteke both go it will be disastrous in my opinion

[aj2k77]

If Delph, Benteke and Vlaar leave then some serious investment needs to take place and not Serie B strikers or Charlton midfielders.

[Matt Collins]

If citeh's interest and the clause are genuine it would make the £12m plus players deal seem more logical.

I think he'd get in the city midfield at the moment. Not if they get pogba in as well though.

[Dave]

I thought release clauses usually stated a minimum amount and not an actual amount.  Also, are there not two types of clause, one an express contractual and the other an implied good faith type.  In both cases, isn't there usually a limiting factor on triggering the clause e.g. relegation, CL qualified club etc.  With a minimum amount, wouldn't this imply that you could get two or more teams bidding.  The player is not a free agent.

What would be the point of a 'minimum amount'? What if the player turned out to be rubbish and you wanted to sell him, but because you've put a minimum amount in the contract you wouldn't be able to? A release clause is just as the name suggests - it entitles the player to trigger his release from the contract.

As for 'implied good faith', why would you put that into a legal contract? If neither party has to abide by it, why would you spend time even putting it in there?

If there were a 'minimum amount' then yes, you could get two teams bidding. But that's not how release clauses work, so therefore you wouldn't. I can't think of any examples where a player has had a buy-out clause in his contract at the time of the transfer and the buying club paid more than they had to. There just wouldn't be a reason for them to do so.

[old man villa fan]

If citeh's interest and the clause are genuine it would make the £12m plus players deal seem more logical.

I think he'd get in the city midfield at the moment. Not if they get pogba in as well though.

Delph is not CL quality and therefore City will be buying other midfield players that are.  Their owners want CL football and will spend the necessary money.  Delph to City would be a waste of his footballing career but would be financially rewarded.  Not being in that financial position, I do not know what it would feel like to get an extra £25k a week (or whatever it would be) for giving up playing week in week out, having dedicated most of his life to reaching the playing level he has.

[old man villa fan]

I thought release clauses usually stated a minimum amount and not an actual amount.  Also, are there not two types of clause, one an express contractual and the other an implied good faith type.  In both cases, isn't there usually a limiting factor on triggering the clause e.g. relegation, CL qualified club etc.  With a minimum amount, wouldn't this imply that you could get two or more teams bidding.  The player is not a free agent.

What would be the point of a 'minimum amount'? What if the player turned out to be rubbish and you wanted to sell him, but because you've put a minimum amount in the contract you wouldn't be able to? A release clause is just as the name suggests - it entitles the player to trigger his release from the contract.

As for 'implied good faith', why would you put that into a legal contract? If neither party has to abide by it, why would you spend time even putting it in there?

If there were a 'minimum amount' then yes, you could get two teams bidding. But that's not how release clauses work, so therefore you wouldn't. I can't think of any examples where a player has had a buy-out clause in his contract at the time of the transfer and the buying club paid more than they had to. There just wouldn't be a reason for them to do so.

Which players have enforced a release clause to get a transfer?